AUBURN — After a year of continued hearings and a site visit, the Conservation Commission, led by newly elected chairman Michael W. Garland, voted unanimously this week to deny Diamond Chevrolet's request for an order of conditions to copy an already replicated wetland off Faith Avenue.

The move, for now, prevents the Massad family from eliminating the road's long, sweeping curve off Route 20, and rerouting Faith Avenue with a proposed straight road through property now occupied by the car dealership.

The Massad family owns 8½ acres at 51 and 54 Faith Ave., and at 768 Washington St., including all property abutting the curved section of Faith Avenue, according to Cynthia Cosgrove, chief assessor.

Last year, Joe Simon, general manager of Diamond, said, "We want to build the town a new road and maintain it for the first year. It wouldn't cost them a cent. We only want to move the wetland 20 feet."

The wetland he was referring to was a replicated wetland built by Diamond last year during a building construction project at the site.

Mr. Simon could not be reached for comment, though Diamond has the option to appeal the commission's decision to the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection's regional office for a superseding order of conditions.

Michael J. Scott, an engineer with Waterman Design Associates Inc. of Westboro, represented the Massads during a hearing before the Conservation Commission that began last July.

The hearing was continued multiple times until it was finally closed on June 25, after commission members toured the site and appeared to agree that the wetland re-replication site might be suitable.

In the meantime, Diamond had pulled its application "without prejudice" for site plan approval from the Planning Board several months ago, since the Conservation Commission was taking so long to vote on an order of conditions.

At the June continued hearing, Mr. Garland, then board vice chairman, said, "This is one of the most thoroughly vetted projects that ever came before this board."

After being elected chairman on Wednesday, he repeated, "This application has been vetted and explored perhaps more than any other application that has come before this board."

Prior to the vote to close the hearing in June, then-chairman Ann L. Weston said the commission could have the next two weeks to "formulate and issue an order of conditions on July 9," and to hear from Margaret Washburn, wetlands consultant for the Conservation Commission. Ms. Washburn was not present at either the June 25 or July 9 meeting.

Ms. Weston said at the June meeting that "clearly the new replication area exceeds the lost area," and asked Mr. Scott if he had any objections to closing the hearing, "with one caveat. We are not allowed to take in more testimony once the hearing is closed … but you will allow Margaret to hear the responses to her questions, and if she has any additional comment, you allow us to accept her additional comment."

Mr. Scott agreed, noting in a joking manner, "I don't expect her to come out of left field with something like, 'Move the road.' "

In Ms. Washburn's written review dated July 2, she did not suggest moving the road, but said, "I have serious reservations that Waterman may have misinterpreted the soil pit data," and "I cannot recommend approving the construction."

She said Waterman Design did not dig enough test pits and "still never told me at what depth the estimated seasonal high groundwater is in the undisturbed wetland."

She said she had concerns about Waterman Design's proposal to introduce clay that "is not recreating the conditions in the existing wetland," and said, "I cannot recommend constructing a wetland replication area in a demolished house foundation, without the opportunity to review test pit data in that location."

Further, she said, "Off-site mitigation would not be in keeping with the performance standards." At the July 9 meeting, Ms. Weston said she had spoken with Ms. Washburn and concluded that the application showed a "failure to meet performance standards."

Commission Vice Chairman Daniel Reich said the proposed replication area was "trying to put a round peg in a square hole. It's just not the right place for it."

Ms. Weston made a motion to issue a denial on the order of conditions, which was seconded and supported unanimously.

In an associated explanation, the commission wrote that Ms. Washburn "is a well-known, well-respected wetlands scientist" and "based on her reports and advice, as well as all of the information provided by the applicant and its various consultants, the commission has determined that it must issue a denial on this project."

On Friday, during a brief telephone conversation, Mr. Scott admitted to being surprised by the commission's decision, but referred any comment to Diamond representatives.